Print this post Print this post

The UK Voted for National Populism

1,236 words

When Brexit won and I heard “Land of Hope and Glory” played at one of the celebrations, I found myself tearing up, much to my surprise. Of course, it makes sense. England is my ancestral homeland. But actually feeling it came as a surprise. It was one of those “Welcome to the human race” experiences.

I was similarly delighted with the outcome of the latest UK general elections, which was good for the National Populism and ethnonationalism not just in Great Britain but around the world.

White nations want National Populism: sensible social conservativism + a state that is willing to intervene in the economy to protect the working and middle classes from plutocracy and globalization. The cosmopolitan elites that rule us want just the opposite: social liberalism + globalization and oligarchy.

Thus our ruling elites have made an art of not giving the voters what they want. In 2016, the UK voted for Brexit, and the political establishment has done everything in its power not to deliver it. In 2016, the American people voted for National Populism and elected Donald Trump, but the political establishment simply dug in its heels against Trump’s National Populist agenda, although they did allow him to deliver tax cuts to billionaires, pardons to Jewish criminals, and basically anything Benjamin Netanyahu asked for.

Now Boris Johnson has won a crushing victory over the Left by promising to “Get Brexit Done.” The Conservative Party gained 48 seats for a solid majority, whereas Labour lost 60 seats. Now Johnson must assert the will of the people over the UK establishment.

There is really no question that the UK voted for National Populism.

Boris Johnson’s main election slogan was “Get Brexit Done.”

But beyond that, Johnson promised more funding for the National Health Service, which benefits working-class and middle-class voters. He also promised to spend more money on the North of England, which has been blighted by globalization.

This was a clear attempt to woo Labour voters, and it succeeded. In effect, Johnson offered the UK popular Labour policies + social conservatism + Brexit = National Populism, whereas Labour offered popular Labour policies + social liberalism + a second referendum on Brexit (and presumably as many more referendums as necessary for the peasants to finally vote for what the elites want).

The result was the biggest defeat for Labour in decades, including the loss of seats in 24 long-time Labour strongholds.

Jeremy Corbyn made many mistakes, but I fundamentally respect his rejection of Tony Blair’s New Labour, which through its embrace of neoliberalism and globalization became the party of rainbow oligarchy. Genuine Leftists like Corbyn should never be given power, but the far Left, like the labor movement, needs to exist, because capitalists can only be persuaded to be good citizens if the threat of communism haunts them every minute of their lives.

The 2019 UK general election was, in effect, the second Brexit referendum that the globalists have been whining about for more than three years, and they are not taking yet another defeat very well. Let’s hope their spirits will break soon. (Perhaps Johnson’s NHS should offer euthanasia to the “literally trembling” crowd on Twitter.)

The Conservatives were not the only winners of National Populist votes, for the Scottish National Party also picked up 13 seats, at the expense of both Labour and the Conservatives. When faced with a choice between populist social policies + Scottish independence or populist social policies without Scottish independence, many Scottish voters naturally chose the National Populist option.

The Scottish National Party now holds 48 of Scotland’s 59 seats in Parliament. Party leader Nicola Sturgeon correctly interprets this as a mandate. The SNP wants to remain in the EU, and if Johnson goes through with Brexit, Sturgeon wants another referendum on Scottish independence.

I hope she gets her way, and I would like to make a suggestion that will ensure that Scottish independence will sail through: let all UK voters vote on it. Large numbers of Englishmen would jump at the chance to hand Scotland her freedom. (The same is true of Quebec independence. Western Canada would have overwhelmingly supported it.)

Frankly, I think the Tories are stupid to oppose Scottish independence. Scottish voters oppose the Tories not just on Brexit but on virtually every other matter of policy. The Tories would actually be stronger if Scotland became independent. (See my essays on Scottish independence here and here.)

But the Tories are not alone in this bloody-minded stupidity. Right-wing Spaniards oppose Catalonian independence, even though Catalonia is a Leftist stronghold and its departure would strengthen the Right in the rest of Spain. Likewise, countless American Republicans have a knee-jerk opposition to Calexit, even though a Calexit would enable Republican hegemony in the rest of America. (See my essay on Calexit here.)

Northern Ireland also wishes to remain in the EU. So if Brexit goes through, the United Kingdom may consist only of England and Wales. So be it.

As an ethnonationalist, I support the right of all European peoples to their own sovereign homelands. Different peoples, even closely related ones, really are different. Thus they are more likely to come into conflict if they have to live in the same system. If England and Wales want to leave the EU and Scotland and Northern Ireland don’t, then the only way for all parties to get their way is to break up the UK.

If Brexit is a good thing because of national sovereignty, then so is Scottish independence, and so is Northern Irish independence as well.

A common objection to secession movements in our circles is that Brexit or Scottish independence won’t really change immigration. But if immigration will happen with or without Brexit, then it is not really a relevant issue in the first place.

Brexit will, however, allow the British to set their own immigration policies rather than Brussels. Scottish independence will allow the Scots to set their own policies rather than London. Under such circumstances, the policies they choose may not suit you, but they are more likely to suit the UK or Scotland.

The root objection to secession is that some people disapprove of the policies that free peoples might adopt. But unless you are British or Scottish or Catalonian, you are missing the whole point of national sovereignty, which is that it allows people to act in ways that others might disapprove of. That’s really the whole point.

White freedom and self-determination will happen one white nation at a time. Thus White Nationalists should applaud Brexit and Scottish independence because they uphold the ethnonationalist principle and demonstrate that national sovereignty can be attained without violence. We want as many such precedents as possible.

The British people have spoken, yet again. But Boris Johnson’s battle has just begun. Now he has to keep his promises in the teeth of the globalist establishment that opposes him. Nationalists of all nations wish him well.

Politics, as they say, is the art of the possible. There is no better proof that something is possible than an example of it being actual. When Brexit passed, suddenly it became conceivable in the minds of millions that Trump could be elected. And surely that change of sentiment actually helped him get elected.

Boris Johnson’s victory now makes Donald Trump’s re-election seem possible, and that makes it more likely. But only if Trump and the Republicans learn the right lesson: National Populism is the wave of the future. Unfortunately, they’re not called the stupid party for nothing.

31 Comments

  1. Merfolk
    Posted December 18, 2019 at 10:13 am | Permalink

    Hmm, I thought immigration and competition with foreign workers was the underlying issue behind Brexit, but the article seems to imply otherwise. What then is the motive behind Brexit in the mind of the average British prole?

    I thought Scotland wanted independence, especially in the face of Brexit, because they are far left pinkos, much like our northeasterners, who actually want to flood Scotland with more third worlders. Edinburgh struck me as not nearly as bad as London when I was there, so maybe this is wrong. Would someone please clarify?

    • HamburgerToday
      Posted December 19, 2019 at 8:10 am | Permalink

      You’re mostly right. SNP are commies and they are totally ethnomasochistic. But the desire for Scottish independence has been around for a long time and there are Scots who are not keen on commies who would support the commies (temporarily) in order to gain independence. The commies think that they will be with the EUSSR forever and enjoy all the resulting vibrancy and enrichment as it floods into their homeland from the Continent. In a year or less after independence, they, too, will enjoy the enrichment of regular grenade attacks and mass rape gangs. In due course, the commie government will get kicked out and hardliners will get elected and all that enrichment will be treated as the Big Ugly that it is.

  2. Dr ExCathedra
    Posted December 18, 2019 at 10:21 am | Permalink

    Regarding the anti-homeless Neo liberal rainbow rock in the picture, I walk past it every day on the way to work. This morning, ironically, it had a graffiti message sprayed on it, to whit: “I no longer recognize my own city. San Francisco, RIP”.

  3. Adrian
    Posted December 18, 2019 at 10:31 am | Permalink

    While I agree with much of what you say in this article, you should not make such unqualified, sweeping statements as that “the Tories are stupid to oppose Scottish independence” because “Scottish voters oppose the Tories not just on Brexit but on virtually every other matter of policy. The Tories would actually be stronger if Scotland became independent. But the Tories are not alone in this bloody-minded stupidity. Right-wing Spaniards oppose Catalonian independence, even though Catalonia is a Leftist stronghold and its departure would strengthen the Right in the rest of Spain.”

    These propositions are to my mind wrong or at the least highly questionable for several reasons, both narrowly factual and more broadly emotional or, put another way, ideological.

    Firstly, the outcome of the general election in Scotland demonstrates not that the SNP has overwhelming popular appeal in Scotland, but rather how the first past the post (“FPTP”) system of elections works badly when more than two parties attract substantial shares of the vote.

    As you correctly observe, the SNP won 48 of the 59 Scottish seats in the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the Conservatives six, the Liberals four and Labour (which until 2015 was hegemonistic in Scottish politics) only one.

    The percentage of votes cast in Scotland however was SNP, 45.0%, Conservative, 25.1%, Labour 18.6%, Liberal 9.5%, Green 1.0% and the Brexit Party 0.5%.

    With the exception of the Scottish Green Party, the others are all pro-Union parties, but the vagaries of FPTP gave the SNP 81% of the Scottish seats on 45% of the vote, the Conservatives, 10% of the seats on a quarter share, the Liberals a little over 6% on a 9.5% share and Labour one seat on a little less than a fifth of the total vote. This outcome may be many things, but it is not representative democracy.

    Secondly, the Conservative party is historically and emotionally a strongly pro-Union party which believes in a British national identity, and rejects English nationalism just as much as (say) Scottish or Irish nationalism. It is not bloody minded stupidity to abide by principle even if short term party advantage points in another direction.

    Thirdly, bound up with my second point, the Spanish analogy proves rather too much. Vox just as much as or more than the Partido Popular believes in the ideal of ¡España, una, grande, libre!, as a core element of its ideology, for which to live or die, not to bargain away for expediency’s sake.

    Abandoning such sentiments would mean the dissolution of both the British and the Spanish states, which is not an outcome that British or Spanish patriots desire.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted December 18, 2019 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

      It is a mistake to attach patriotism to states and empires rather than peoples.

      • Adrian
        Posted December 18, 2019 at 1:19 pm | Permalink

        Greg, while your proposition is per se correct, it begs the question, what is my nation? Clearly that question may be answered in different ways (I recall that posing it caused some trouble on your side of the Atlantic in 1861!). I’d make the (gentle) reproach to you that an American should be a little careful about offering an answer to that question for (from your perspective) foreigners, whether British or Spanish, as the issues raised are complex, both in the UK and in Spain. I understand both the northern and southern points of view in 1861, tend to sympathise with the South, but would not pretend to be able to answer such questions in a country not my own.

      • HungarianFashionista
        Posted December 19, 2019 at 11:06 am | Permalink

        What is the Hungarian people without the Crown of St. Stephen?

        Makers of goulash.

        We reject ethnic food nationalism.

  4. Alexandra O
    Posted December 18, 2019 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    I appreciate your post on the election results for Boris Johnson in Britain. It was indeed a much-needed victory for the people of Britain who had voted for Brexit in the first place, only to nearly give up any hope of its becoming reality due to the shaming and blaming issuing from the Leftists in Parliament, led by Jeremy Corbyn. Citizens who voted for populist candidates in both Britain and America are tired of being called names by the losers, and finding that the leftists are trying every vile trick in their playbook to upset the vote of the people! We are surely sick of it here in America — the impeachment vote is taking place as I write this — and the British populist victory has been an uplifting event to those of us who voted for Trump — or for his ideals and promises at least — and who have also been shamed and blamed for the past three years for our ‘deplorable’ choice. Bravo for Britain and Brexit!

  5. Nikandros
    Posted December 18, 2019 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

    Another secession example is Crimea and the Donbass region in Eastern Ukraine. It seems obvious that if the rest of the Ukraine just let these heavily ethnic Russian areas go, they would be much more united and wouldn’t have to worry about another Yanukovych getting elected ever again. But alas, I think it’s the big boys at the top that are really calling the shots all over the world. They fear a secession snowball effect at a time when they are trying to move things in the opposite direction.

    • HungarianFashionista
      Posted December 19, 2019 at 11:04 am | Permalink

      It seems obvious that if the rest of the Ukraine just let these heavily ethnic Russian areas go, they would be much more united

      They would fall apart, probably along the former imperial borders. That’s why they’re desperate to hold on to the Russians. They don’t want to create precedents and give ideas for others – i.e. “Western Ukrainians”, read: Rusyns – who may also want to go. Ukraine is an empire but in denial of it.

  6. Stirnerite
    Posted December 18, 2019 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    The arguments for Scottish independence are sound but the SNP is an anti-White social democratic civic nationalist party fueled by anti-English resentment, which is the only element of the party that can in any way be described as populist; it wants to use its newfound independence to immediately re-join the EU.

    As for Boris, he’s an invade the world, invite the world “liberal conservative” who backed the leave vote purely for reasons of political expediency after years of supporting British EU membership. He has supported every disastrous Middle-Eastern war since Iraq. He’s described himself as “the most pro-immigration politician in the country) and probably means it, as he’s the only major politician calling for an “amnesty” for illegal immigrants. He’s also (of course) a hardline Zionist while being soft on Muslims (despite the occasional “offensive” joke).

    But that’s exactly why Johnson is described as a “populist” and it’s all posturing. He compares burka-clad women to letterboxes (while not caring if they wear it and supporting the importation of more) and people seem to think he’s some kind of hardline national conservative. He’s at least as bad as Cameron and in significant ways worse than Corbyn (Boris will not do anything about the plutocratic economic system that benefits his class of Jews and Anglo-traitors or oppose the Jewish Mid-East wars for similar reasons).

    The vote itself shows that people are sick of the anti-democratic ruling-class that has spend the last 3 or 4 years trying to frustrate and ultimately overturn the will of the people to leave the EU. It’s also indicative that Corbyn and the sub-mediocrities that compose the Labour party have zero credibility with the British people outside the lunatic fringe, the very young and ethnic minorities. One positive is that the Tory win could be seen as a vindication of populism internationally but this is certainly a victory for style over substance.

    • L
      Posted December 20, 2019 at 1:03 am | Permalink

      Points well taken. I think Boris Johnson is like Trump, though even less principled (but possibly more politically astute; Trump says what he really believes, which just happened to correspond with the Zeitgeist in 2016). I’m sure he’ll get Brexit done, but otherwise, from a classically rightist perspective (which is what I am, NOT “national populist”, except very provisionally), he will be bad, though not nearly as catastrophic as Corbyn.

      What Greg Johnson fails to understand is that real people are harmed by leftist economic as well as social and racial policies. Britain pre-Thatcher was, as a British friend of mine who moved back home in the early 80s described it, “piss-poor” (compared to the USA at that time). There is an immense literature on why free markets succeed in raising national prosperity (as well as civility and civilization in general), and why socialism wrecks not just the economy, but society. I think Dr. Johnson is so opposed to neoliberal anti-tribalism/nationalism/patriotism (as am I) that he fails to consider all the ways in which free markets make life better.

      What nationalists need to advocate is, in a sense, what Trump has actually done (though only slightly – which is good news, as it illustrates the meliorative power of this approach, especially if more fully implemented): pro-growth free market policies [tax reductions; massive deregulation, except for border and immigration controls and basic law enforcement; privatizations wherever feasible, with the proceeds used to pay off our gargantuan and ultimately fiscally unsustainable National Debt; and huge spending reductions in those areas which disproportionately benefit either nonwhites or leftists], as vast numbers of all non-Marxists, very much including precious “working-class voters” (BTW, most Trump supporters are not “working class”; they are conventional bourgeois conservatives, a fact the national populists seem to overlook), WANT a growing economy with plentiful jobs (precisely: more jobs will only come with business expansion, which can only be obtained in already advanced First World economies via streamlining government’s jackboot-print smothering the natural energy of the free market), combined with protecting those elements of social democracy that disproportionately benefit whites (eg, Social Security and Medicare), along with perhaps legislating some anti-outsourcing laws, making it more expensive for US-based corporations to close plants here and relocate them to the Third World.

      Basically, the formula for rightist success, esp in the US, for the foreseeable future is :

      A. Opposition to all forms of nonwhite immigration;

      B. Opposition to “bad trade deals” and jobs outsourcing;

      C. Opposition to “wokeness” and anti-patriotism;

      D. Pro-police and law + order policies;

      E. Opposition to socialism and the welfare state, except for those elements that are popular with Middle America (mainly Soc Sec, Medicare, aid to the disabled, and – I hate this, it’s such an abused scam – unemployment “compensation”);

      F. Opposition to Federal Reserve inflationism and soft money policies (which kills middle class savers and the {disproportionately White} elderly, as well as being inherently unfair and economically destructive);

      G. Opposition to useless foreign entanglements, as well as losses of national sovereignty.

      In a phrase – NATIONAL CAPITALISM (nationalism + economic growth/prosperity). This is basically what Trump ran on, even if he failed to deliver very much.

      • A.M.
        Posted December 27, 2019 at 8:46 am | Permalink

        “What Greg Johnson fails to understand is that real people are harmed by leftist economic …policies.” What you fail to understand is that real people are harmed by their absence
        also.

  7. John Wilkinson
    Posted December 18, 2019 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    Sometimes I am given hope of democracy actually working after all.

    Thank you

  8. Tristan
    Posted December 18, 2019 at 4:03 pm | Permalink

    “Right-wing Spaniards oppose Catalonian independence, even though Catalonia is a Leftist stronghold and its departure would strengthen the Right in the rest of Spain.”

    Wow, this is exactly what Iberia and Europe really need right now: a gaping hole of third world immigration into our lands.

    I would support Catalans going their own way if they were pro-White. As that’s not the case, in fact it’s the very opposite, I want them to get the hell out of here and go commit racial suicide somewhere else, preferably in Venezuela. We will never allow them to destroy Iberia or Europe. If saving my race requires the destruction of Catalans, so be it.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted December 18, 2019 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

      1. There are gaping holes everywhere in Spain because the state refuses to protect its existing borders.

      2. If Spain is threatened by Catalonian immigration policies, all it would have to do is enforce its borders.

      I think you are one of those bloody-minded fools I was talking about. You are not thinking about this even a tiny bit.

    • Jules
      Posted December 20, 2019 at 11:47 am | Permalink

      Wow, this is exactly what Iberia and Europe really need right now: a gaping hole of third world immigration into our lands.

      I guess it would depend on whether Catalonia is allowed into the EU or whether Spain stays in it.

      If one or the other were not in the EU (ie. free movement of people) then the problem would be solved by simply having a real border between an independent Catalonia and the rest of Spain.

  9. alt
    Posted December 18, 2019 at 7:26 pm | Permalink

    “The same is true of Quebec independence. Western Canada would have overwhelmingly supported it.”

    This is a problem with petty nationalism, geography doesnt care about ethnic differences. It may very well be true voters may want to stick up their fingers at the French but Canada as an independent entity cannot survive if Quebec were to separate. The east would necessarily be forced to ask for statehood. Ontario would lose access to the sea and the west we would lose any hope of moving oil east.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted December 18, 2019 at 10:18 pm | Permalink

      This is like saying that the United States can’t exist because Alaska and Hawaii are not geographically contiguous with the other 48 states.

      • alt
        Posted December 19, 2019 at 6:45 am | Permalink

        A non straw man comparison would be too separate 30% of the United States population, the Mississippi, cut the country in half, and severely harm good will for future relations between the successor states. It’s not even speculation Canada would have further broken appart in the case of seperation; eastern premiers seriously discussed joining the United States in case Quebec left, which was only avoided by 1% of the vote

  10. Muhammad Aryan
    Posted December 19, 2019 at 1:00 am | Permalink

    As mayor, Alexander Johnson intensified the Bolshevisation of London that began under his predecessor Ken Livingstone.

    His number 2 and 3 are non-British.

    He supports sexual perversion.

    He doesn’t promote family values.

    Like an obedient Establishmentrian, he grovels at the feet of the Hebrews. There are reports that he might undertake legislation to outlaw BDS.

    And for the gazillionth time, Brexit has nothing to do with nationalism. It was triggered by the likes of Liam Foxes of the world who would like to realize their wet dreams of a libertarian, profit making, departmental Britain. And to do that they have to withdraw from the Supreme Soviet of the EU.

    Brexit is the hijacking of White British nationalism by commerce.

    What else can one expect from a ‘Conservative’ party which today promotes and conserves the cultural Bolshevism of Tony Blair?

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted December 19, 2019 at 1:40 am | Permalink

      Wow, you must sit at thr right hand of God. Thanks for sharing all your inside info. The rest of us will have to wait and see what the British do with their newly won independence, and what meaning they will create from it.

  11. Peter Quint
    Posted December 19, 2019 at 7:26 am | Permalink

    The jews aren’t going to like this, heads are going to roll–literally!

  12. HamburgerToday
    Posted December 19, 2019 at 8:16 am | Permalink

    Very good points. It is important to break up the universalist, integrationist neoliberal paradigm in order to make way for new political forms. Some of those political forms are not going to be — or even lead to — racial nationalism, but that is how is should be. The first political principle is sovereignty. Without sovereignty, it doesn’t matter what the desired final outcome is, because it is beyond ones power to achieve it. Sovereignty forms the canvas upon which the various peoples/nations of the world express their political aesthetic.

  13. HungarianFashionista
    Posted December 19, 2019 at 11:01 am | Permalink

    According to the linguistic census held by the Government of Catalonia in 2013, Spanish is the most spoken language in Catalonia (46.53% claim Spanish as “their own language”), followed by Catalan (37.26% claim Catalan as “their own language”). In everyday use, 11.95% of the population claim to use both languages equally, whereas 45.92% mainly use Spanish and 35.54% mainly use Catalan. There is a significant difference between the Barcelona metropolitan area (and, to a lesser extent, the Tarragona area), where Spanish is more spoken than Catalan, and the more rural and small town areas, where Catalan clearly prevails over Spanish. (Wikipedia)

    Regarding Brexit, more often than not the UK has been on the side of the V4 in the Brussels trench warfare. We’re sad to see them go.

    But Hungary has the enlargement portfolio for the next 4 years and we’ll try to help the entry of the West Balkans – starting with our historic allies/enemies, the lovely Serbs. They would be a great addition to V4.*

    The enemy invested a lot in the EU project, and no doubt they’re a little upset now. But at the end of the day, they probably don’t care. ‘Empire? Fine, we just have to take control of the centre. A hundred bite size statelets? Fine, easy to eat, easy to digest.’ And keeping European elites busy for the next 30 years with border disputes and export-import tariffs on ketchup would very much work to their advantage.

    * There’s a good-looking Serb temple in downtown Budapest at 4 Szerb Street, originally built by settlers who moved to Hungary during the Ottoman Wars. The northernmost point of Serb settlements is the town of Szentendre, above Budapest on the right bank of the Danube. We are, and have always been, intertwined.

  14. Robert R
    Posted December 19, 2019 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

    Wouldn’t breaking up a nation such as the UK be somewhat of a return to the Middle Ages? Like France and to some extent Spain, the UK has centralized power at great cost and thereafter accomplished much for our civilization. This is not like breaking up Belgium. It’s more like breaking up the Roman Empire.

    Would history repeat itself and lead to another centuries-long process of unification? Let’s hope the elites will be more trustworthy and colonization by foreigners warded off.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted December 20, 2019 at 1:25 am | Permalink

      The UK isn’t a nation. It is an empire composed of four different nations. Those nations have different histories and values. At once point, they spoke entirely different languages. They might be happier and get along better if they did not have to live in the same political order. Look at Brexit. Northern Ireland and Scotland overwhelmingly oppose it. The English overwhelmingly supported it. The only way for all parties to get what they want is to go their separate ways.

      I don’t know how centralizing power = accomplishing a lot for civilization. Central power is not always bad, but neither is it always good.

      I am all for breaking up empires.

      • Robert R
        Posted December 20, 2019 at 10:46 pm | Permalink

        Thank you for your reply Greg. I need to read more on the history of the UK.

        I may have a reductionist view of History where powers rise or fall and nations conquer or are conquered. We’ve had a long intermission perhaps following the industrial-scale trauma of the last word war and under the threat of nuclear warfare. Or perhaps this has changed the nature of the conflict whereby conquests occur without shedding blood. Aren’t our lands in the process of being conquered or colonized by foreigners?

        I understand why you’re favorable to the dismantling of empires. I do wonder however how those four UK nations would have developed the hard power and soft power that led to English North-America, for instance, without being centralized.

  15. DissidentRightFriend
    Posted December 20, 2019 at 4:55 pm | Permalink

    Your Millenniyule cast this week was quite good Greg. Do regular podcasts – it’s one of your strengths. On a tangent, what are your main crticisms of The Joker film. Too campy or nihilistic? Subversive in ways that we missed?

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted December 20, 2019 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

      Look at the review here at CC.

    • Lord Shang
      Posted December 22, 2019 at 10:45 pm | Permalink

      JOKER was boring. I kept waiting for some big action blowout – nothing. Superhero/villain movies should never forget what they are: entertainment, not anything artistically or socially meaningful.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
 
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
 
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*
*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs

    Cynosura

    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics

    Rising

    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Reuben

    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance